The president of the University of Sioux Falls is suing Delta Airlines over an incident last fall that ended with a night in a Queens, N.Y., jail.

Mark Benedetto was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm after a fall trip to New York City, and his lawsuit claims that Delta breached its duty to him as a customer by failing to inform him of the cityís restrictive gun laws.

Sorry but this should be considered under FOPA. NYC blatantly ignores it most of the time.

HowardW56

06-10-2012, 7:11 PM

Sorry but this should be considered under FOPA. NYC blatantly ignores it most of the time.

Suing the airline is an interesting twist...

SilverBulletZ06

06-10-2012, 7:19 PM

Suing the airline is an interesting twist...

But completely irrelevant. You could possibly sue because they accepted your firearms and should be entrusted to keep them legal until the end of your journey, but it is up the individual to know the gun laws.

Dreaded Claymore

06-10-2012, 7:58 PM

I don't like New York's gun laws, and I hate that they regularly ignore federal law in order to imprison innocent people who have them. But this man is firmly in the wrong with regards to his lawsuit and I hope he loses. He is helping make our country into a lawsuitocracy.

dantodd

06-10-2012, 8:17 PM

I would love for this to actually succeed but it won't.

SilverTauron

06-10-2012, 8:43 PM

Benedetto declared that he had an unloaded handgun in a locked case inside his checked luggage, as required by the Transportation Security Administration and Delta Airlines policy.

Benedetto has a concealed carry permit for South Dakota but was unaware that it is illegal to possess a firearm in New York unless the gun owner is a New York resident with a state and local concealed carry permit.

He and his wife made it to New York without any problem. When he declared the firearm to the Delta ticket agent at La Guardia on Oct. 2, however, the declaration caught the attention of the airline.

“Without warning or explanation, the Delta ticket agent proceeded to notify the New York-New Jersey Port Authority Police via telephone that he had a passenger who had declared a firearm” the lawsuit says.

Benedetto subsequently was turned over to New York police and transported to the Queens Boulevard Precinct and was jailed for a night under what the lawsuit calls “horrendous conditions.”

The bolded part is why he's suing the airline.With that circumstance established, he's justified in filing suit against the airline.

The following is the ruling on the case of Revell vs the Port Authority of NJ and NY,a case where Revell was legally travelling with a firearm from his home state to PA and suffered the misfortune of his aircraft making an unplanned diversion to NJ. He was put in a hotel for the night in NJ, and was arrested the following day when he declared the firearm in his luggage. He then sued the Port Authority for violating the FOPA.

Stranded gun owners like Revell have the option of going to law enforcement representatives at an airport or to airport personnel before they retrieve their luggage. The careful owner will do so and explain his situation, requesting that his firearm and ammunition be held for him overnight.¬ While this no doubt adds to the inconvenience imposed upon the unfortunate traveler when his transportation plans go awry, it offers a reasonable means for a responsible gun owner to maintain the protection of Section 926 and prevent unexpected exposure to state and local gun regulations.

Since this is the decision based on an accidental circumstance, this poor guy has no hope of legal recourse via suing under violation of the FOPA. According to the NRA, it is lettered policy of the New York State District Attorney's office to flagrantly ignore the FOPA and to arrest anyone travelling into or out of the state with a firearm sans local paperwork.

Link to an article on the Revell case here:
http://www.ohioverticals.com/blogs/akron_law_cafe/2011/01/revell-v-port-authority-of-new-york-and-new-jersey/

safewaysecurity

06-10-2012, 8:50 PM

I don't like New York's gun laws, and I hate that they regularly ignore federal law in order to imprison innocent people who have them. But this man is firmly in the wrong with regards to his lawsuit and I hope he loses. He is helping make our country into a lawsuitocracy.

How do you figure? Delta knew he was going to NYC with a handgun and decided to let him violate the law instead of informing him of the law. Under federal law I don't believe what he did was illegal but NYC thinks so and Delta clearly knows this and decided not to inform him. If anything Delta should be criminally prosecuted for being an accessory to w/e the crime was.

Bill Carson

06-10-2012, 9:00 PM

Two things. University Pres and any responsible gun owner should check the gun laws of any state he is going to visit. Isn't it Delta airlines that is in violation by illegally importing the gun into the state ?

Icypu

06-10-2012, 9:01 PM

NYC is full of silly laws. Good thing for the university president for not being weak.

fizux

06-10-2012, 9:19 PM

How is it that racial discrimination at a single restaurant can be regulated by the Feds as "interstate commerce" because it deters interstate travel (Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 (1964)), but this enumerated right isn't worthy of Fed protection?

Gray Peterson

06-10-2012, 9:35 PM

How is it that racial discrimination at a single restaurant can be regulated by the Feds as "interstate commerce" because it deters interstate travel (Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 (1964)), but this enumerated right isn't worthy of Fed protection?

Because Congress screwed up in writing the statute, that's why.

That's why the Griffith Bill was introduced: HR4269

nick

06-10-2012, 9:58 PM

Two things. University Pres and any responsible gun owner should check the gun laws of any state he is going to visit. Isn't it Delta airlines that is in violation by illegally importing the gun into the state ?

Not everyone lives in states like CA and NY, and so not everyone thinks of the possibility of an arrest the moment he touches a gun. To most people in free states guns are commonplace, they're yet another tool. Do you check screwdriver laws if you happen to travel with one in your car? Do you always check traffic rules before going to NYC? Do you check whether wearing belts wider than 2" is legal there?

Come to think of it, the ignorance of the law, especially state and local laws for out-of-staters, should be an affirmative defense. After all, it is so for government employees, and no person can possibly know all the applicable laws in any situation, including lawyers and judges. We just have too many damn laws, for a lot of non-crimes and non-issues, and the penalties for committing these non-crimes are often more severe than for committing real crimes, with real victims.

SilverTauron

06-10-2012, 10:18 PM

Not everyone lives in states like CA and NY, and so not everyone thinks of the possibility of an arrest the moment he touches a gun. To most people in free states guns are commonplace, they're yet another tool. Do you check screwdriver laws if you happen to travel with one in your car? Do you always check traffic rules before going to NYC? Do you check whether wearing belts wider than 2" is legal there?

Come to think of it, the ignorance of the law, especially state and local laws for out-of-staters, should be an affirmative defense. After all, it is so for government employees, and no person can possibly know all the applicable laws in any situation, including lawyers and judges. We just have too many damn laws, for a lot of non-crimes and non-issues, and the penalties for committing these non-crimes are often more severe than for committing real crimes, with real victims.

Indeed. In many ways its virtually impossible for a citizen to know all the laws -and practical interpretation-of every place they may visit on their travels. Practical interpretation matters,because if one is stopped by an Anti 2A cop who enforces a local -and technically illegal but nonetheless enforced-law against firearms, the citizen still goes to jail.

An example of this was my last visit to Illinois:before departure I spent HOURS researching individual statutes of towns and cities I'd drive through regarding gun laws, since the lack of state pre-emption means the IL State Police guidelines on safe travel are worthless. After hours of research I believed I had a fair idea of the places to visit and the places to avoid. Nonetheless, when visiting a range in that state I was told by the greeter had I set foot into the mall the range was attached to with a locked and unloaded firearm Id be carted off to jail like the last two guys they nailed doing so. Had I chosen a different door to enter the store/range through , id be subject to charges-and the laws *were not posted anywhere I could find*. No online references could be found-yet I doubt given the area and culture that it was any kind of FUD.

Of course, like Revell discovered the hard way you may end up in "enemy territory" without notice or warning. What if your flight to Maine winds up diverting to LaGuardia, where the moment the plane hits the runway you're a criminal?

Maestro Pistolero

06-10-2012, 10:20 PM

I would like to know what is the legal obligation of the airline to inform the local police? Why can't they just STFU and process the firearm declaration like they do in 48 other states?

Decoligny

06-10-2012, 10:22 PM

How do you figure? Delta knew he was going to NYC with a handgun and decided to let him violate the law instead of informing him of the law. Under federal law I don't believe what he did was illegal but NYC thinks so and Delta clearly knows this and decided not to inform him. If anything Delta should be criminally prosecuted for being an accessory to w/e the crime was.

Not to mention that it was a Delta counter person who called the Police for an action that is not a crime under FOPA.

fizux

06-10-2012, 11:04 PM

Because Congress screwed up in writing the statute, that's why.

That's why the Griffith Bill was introduced: HR4269

I suppose I should distinguish between the legal reason versus the implementation policy. On the legal side, I'm shocked when Congress reads a bill before voting on it.

I guess I'm more disappointed about the dichotomy of the Feds swooping in to screw with states' voter ID laws, but they don't protect the guy who gets nailed for following the CFRs.

Apparently, some fundamental rights are more equal than others.

stix213

06-10-2012, 11:17 PM

The lawsuit isn't going to go anywhere I expect. But I do know not to ever be a customer of Delta again. Their behavior is terrible, though I don't think they are actually liable here. IANAL

speedrrracer

06-11-2012, 6:37 AM

Indeed. In many ways its virtually impossible for a citizen to know all the laws -and practical interpretation-of every place they may visit on their travels.

In many ways? Are you kidding? You could put any lawyer or judge in front of me, give me all 4,084,923 volumes of Federal and State laws and it won't take long before I flip to a page that Lawyer X or Judge Y has no clue about.

It is absolutely impossible for any human to know not only all the laws, but all the applicable case law.

Anyways, IF it is a crime to import guns into NYC, AND the airport is part of NYC, THEN I would argue the airline is certainly guilty of having committed it's own crime. The CEO of Delta can share the bunk with the Univ. Pres. to save taxpayer dollars.

Punish the airline heavily enough (if it's a crime on their part) and I guarantee you within a year all airlines will have automated checks to prevent any guns from being flown into cities where they are illegal.

Wherryj

06-11-2012, 8:41 AM

I don't like New York's gun laws, and I hate that they regularly ignore federal law in order to imprison innocent people who have them. But this man is firmly in the wrong with regards to his lawsuit and I hope he loses. He is helping make our country into a lawsuitocracy.

Our country is already beyond "lawsuitocracy". I'd say that we've arrived at a religion that worships the lawsuit.

Maestro Pistolero

06-11-2012, 9:33 AM

I would like to know what is the legal obligation of the airline to inform the local police?Very curious about this.

Untamed1972

06-11-2012, 9:36 AM

Very curious about this.

Yeah....me too. Why dont the airlines just mind their own business and as long as the gun is being transported according to federal regs then just check it and move along.

sholling

06-11-2012, 9:40 AM

The airline injected itself into this case when their employee called the police therefore I hope that the lawsuit succeeds. If the airline does not wish to be sued it should train its employees to process checked weapons without calling the police.

Maestro Pistolero

06-11-2012, 10:10 AM

In almost all of the rest of the states in which Delta does business, they have no more assurance that the passengers checking and declaring firearms are not prohibited than they do in NY. What gives? STFU and take care of your customer.

Where and how are they required to throw their customers under the bus?

ICONIC

06-11-2012, 10:16 AM

Delta called the police, instead of informing or rejecting to transport a firearm. Therefore they should be held liable

Maestro Pistolero

06-11-2012, 10:38 AM

I am not so sure he doesn't have a point. The airline is in a unique position to know the local laws and their immediate consequences. On their site they advise what the procedure is to comply:

Weapons
We do allow small arms ammunition, in quantities not exceeding 11 lbs. (5 kg) per person, as checked-baggage only. The weapon must be securely boxed and intended for that person's own use. More than one passenger may not combine quantities into one package. See more details under shooting equipment.
Below are additional guidelines related to traveling with weapons:
Firearms are permitted as checked-baggage with special requirements.
Gunpowder (e.g., Pyrodex, black powder, mace, pepper spray, and tear gas) is never permitted.http://www.delta.com/traveling_checkin/baggage/dangerous_goods/index.jsp

Once Delta has assumed the role of advising their customers as to how to comply with something as critical as checking firearms onto a commercial airline, I believe they have an obligation to provide complete information. Especially, and at LEAST, they should alert their customers to specific laws, such as NY, and NJ, that are anomalous to the rest of the country, and that potentially place their customers in significant legal jeopardy, including possible felony charges.

gun toting monkeyboy

06-11-2012, 10:59 AM

Yeah, I have to say that Delta knew he was taking a firearm there. And they knew better than he did that it would be a problem. They can't say that they didn't know, because it was their employee that called the cops on him.

SgtMerc

06-11-2012, 11:37 AM

I am not so sure he doesn't have a point. The airline is in a unique position to know the local laws and their immediate consequences. On their site they advise what the procedure is to comply:

Once Delta has assumed the role of advising their customers as to how to comply with something as critical as checking firearms onto a commercial airline, I believe they have an obligation to provide complete information. Especially, and at LEAST, they should alert their customers to specific laws, such as NY, and NJ, that are anomalous to the rest of the country, and that potentially place their customers in significant legal jeopardy, including possible felony charges.

:iagree:

Most laws are judged on if a "reasonable" person would find them guilty. With that logic, it's unreasonable that the Airline would publish firearms guidelines and not specify.

At the very least, the man should have been informed when he checked into his departing flight with his firearm. "Sir, this checked firearm is not legal for your destination" given that Delta knew his intent, his destination, and his return plans, it's squarely on them since the man was otherwise within regulations.

It wouldn't even be difficult. Just add a line to the pre-check-in questionnaire. "Did you pack your own bags? Do you have any hazardous materials? Do you have any firearms? oh, you have a firearm... if you have a firearm, is your destination in any of the following states?"

RazzB7

06-11-2012, 11:52 AM

I think the fact that A) The Delta employee didn't warn him about NYC gun laws and B) different Delta employee called the police will lead to culpability in the lawsuit. To me, it proves that Delta employees are in fact aware of the law.

OleCuss

06-11-2012, 12:12 PM

I like the lawsuit and hope that he wins.

An airline should not accept as lawful the transport of a firearm and then call LEO and report him as a lawbreaker.

And if his actions were lawful under FOPA, then they harmed him by falsely reporting his behavior/actions as criminal.

While I greatly hope he wins, I'd not hazard a guess as to the odds of a win. I know far too little of the relevant law.

But if he wins? I see lawsuits against all the airlines who are doing this (and I'm guessing it is all airlines).

It'd be sweet to have the airlines hauling the appropriate NY authorities into court for requiring that they report as criminal, perfectly appropriate behaviors.

Maestro Pistolero

06-11-2012, 12:32 PM

And if his actions were lawful under FOPA . . .Well, they weren't covered under FOPA, because NY was the destination. This isn't a FOPA case, and they aren't claiming it is, AFAIN.

Agent Orange

06-11-2012, 2:08 PM

I would like to know what is the legal obligation of the airline to inform the local police? Why can't they just STFU and process the firearm declaration like they do in 48 other states?

Probably no legal obligation but you have to keep in mind the Delta employee who ratted the guy out was in all likelihood a local. Anyone who has ever dealt with New Yorkers in general or the people at those airports will understand. I want to vomit every time I go through there.

Aldemar

06-11-2012, 2:27 PM

Very curious about this.

Me too. If I may speculate, I would imagine that the airlines may have a contractual obligation to inform an airport operator of any declared firearms they may be carrying as well as any other "contraband" (ie hollow-points in NJ) I would think most airports do not have this requirement, however, since handguns are a no-no in NYC, the Port Authority may have it written into it's use contract with every airline that flies there regardless of the airplanes scheduled destination.

vincewarde

06-11-2012, 2:45 PM

Sorry but this should be considered under FOPA. NYC blatantly ignores it most of the time.

Yep, and very high on the Republican agenda is the amendment to FOPA to impose severe penalties on those jurisdictions that violate it.

Someone needs to file a class action suit against Bloomberg, NYPD and the city over this. Given the sheer number of people this has happened to, the damages would be in the tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars. A big payday for some smart lawyer.

vincewarde

06-11-2012, 2:52 PM

Well, they weren't covered under FOPA, because NY was the destination. This isn't a FOPA case, and they aren't claiming it is, AFAIN.

I stand corrected FOPA indeed does not apply if NYC is the destination.

vincewarde

06-11-2012, 2:56 PM

Since handguns are a no-no in NYC, the Port Authority may have it written into it's use contract with every airline that flies there regardless of the airplanes scheduled destination, Pa in this case.

If they do, said agreement had better be compliant with FOPA - or a more gun friendly administration could prosecute all involved for violating the civil rights of gun owners passing through NY Airports - and conspiracy to do the same. Holder won't do this, but there is an election coming :)

Kodemonkey

06-11-2012, 3:03 PM

Geebus... how hard is it to add a few lines of code to check destination.

If destination = New York and
passenger check firearm flag = true
than error

You can't expect the departing city baggage agents to be abreast of all the stupid gun laws, but it's pretty easy to do with a computer.

Unless this whole thing was entrapment of some sort, but that's some serious tin foil...

Lugiahua

06-11-2012, 3:35 PM

Not only I hope he wins, I wish this case can be use against NYC and airliners later...

socalblue

06-11-2012, 6:11 PM

Yep, and very high on the Republican agenda is the amendment to FOPA to impose severe penalties on those jurisdictions that violate it.

Someone needs to file a class action suit against Bloomberg, NYPD and the city over this. Given the sheer number of people this has happened to, the damages would be in the tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars. A big payday for some smart lawyer.

Why? NYC was the destination, where he stayed for several days. Stupidity = penalty.

Is Delta potentially on the hook? I would think not, as TSA would have called NYPD when contacted to screen the firearm.

Certain airports (NY, Chicago, etc.) do need to have good FOPA signage & process - I can see a successful court action there.

gunsmith

06-11-2012, 6:14 PM

could someone fly to NY with a pistol, then upon landing, call the police and say the airline luggage handlers are in possession of an illegal pistol and have them arrested?

monkeshine

06-11-2012, 6:21 PM

I don't understand the basis for suing the airline? What is the theory, or foundation, or "motive"?

I am a Delta "Diamond Medallion" 3 years running which means I fly more than 125,000 miles a year each year with Delta. I think it was downright low of the woman to rat him out, especially since she could tell with a click of a keyboard that he flew into JFK with the firearm so its not so unusual that he is flying out with it. But I don't understand his cause of action. Someone please explain thanks.

Gray Peterson

06-11-2012, 6:38 PM

I don't think I can explain the reason, but he's going to do one "good thing" with this: Cause Delta to not allow any checked firearms at all.

Maestro Pistolero

06-11-2012, 7:26 PM

I don't think I can explain the reason, but he's going to do one "good thing" with this: Cause Delta to not allow any checked firearms at all.

I doubt that very seriously.

dantodd

06-11-2012, 7:34 PM

I don't think I can explain the reason, but he's going to do one "good thing" with this: Cause Delta to not allow any checked firearms at all.

Even better all airlines might refuse to crack any firearms. That is when it gets interesting. Kinda like bus companies not accepting certain passengers.

Schlyme

06-11-2012, 7:57 PM

How do you figure? Delta knew he was going to NYC with a handgun and decided to let him violate the law instead of informing him of the law. Under federal law I don't believe what he did was illegal but NYC thinks so and Delta clearly knows this and decided not to inform him. If anything Delta should be criminally prosecuted for being an accessory to w/e the crime was.

So you're saying an airline agent working in Siuox Falls should be know the gun laws of another city/state. Then so should the President of the university. As far as the person calling the cops, probably like stated. A local "being a good citizen":rolleyes: according to himself.

The University president needs to sue NYC and Port Authority, maybe the airline agent personally as well.

By suing the Airline to me it looks like he just wants a paycheck, not to correct a misjustice done to him.

And you never know, if successful airlines may reconsider taking the liability of letting passengers transport firearms. just mho

edit: Even if the agent had not called the police, the TSA sure would have after screening the bag. Then there would have been 2 arrests!

Maybe airlines won't ban the transport of guns, but I'd be surprised if they come out with some form of liability waiver saying it's up to the person flying to know the laws along their route.

MP301

06-11-2012, 8:45 PM

So you're saying an airline agent working in Siuox Falls should be know the gun laws of another city/state. Then so should the President of the university. As far as the person calling the cops, probably like stated. A local "being a good citizen":rolleyes: according to himself.

The University president needs to sue NYC and Port Authority, maybe the airline agent personally as well.

By suing the Airline to me it looks like he just wants a paycheck, not to correct a misjustice done to him.

And you never know, if successful airlines may reconsider taking the liability of letting passengers transport firearms. just mho

I doubt that more than maybe Delta would do that and thats only because this is going to cost them- win or lose. But, 2A is a federal "individual right" and its even applied to the states I hear. Now add in the commerce clause and see how far things get with all airlines banning guns in checked baggage for a fundamental right involving interstate travel. I see major more expense fighting that kind of lawsuit than adding a simple computer program that deals with passengers with guns flying into cesspool states like NY, NJ, etc.

The good that may come out of this is that the airlines will make damn skippy thier computers red flag anyone flying to, or laying over in, one of those POS states. That is sure a lot easier and less expensive than fighting a major commerce clause 2A type of suit that our buddy Gura would make millions on.

And yeah, those of us in CA have enough legal BS to deal with that we would be more apt to check things out before travel because we do it all the time now. BUt thiose from less restrictive states may not. So, its easy to say that he shoudl have known beter blah blah blah, I hope he wins. Id rather see NY get screwed like it deserves, but I have no problem with delta paying the price for it one little bit.

And if you think about it, the Delta employee at check in where he flew from didnt say anything, but the one in NY did when it was to late to avoid the problem. That interesting twist is whast i think will cost Delta and im fine with that. The guy with the suit will wonder why its ok for Delta employees to call the police after the fact, but not call the police or warn him before it was too late....

SgtMerc

06-11-2012, 8:56 PM

It's things like this that make me cognizant of how the public insulate themselves from "evil" things like guns.

Really? ~ "And unless he was packing a .22 rifle to go skeet shooting, most likely he was carrying a pocket-sized gun which was intended to be carried concealed." :facepalm:

In South Dakota, take it from me when I say firearms really are treated like ordinary tools. Most people here -including 'urban' Sioux Falls, which is the largest city (you guys in CA have towns bigger than Sioux Falls, but I digress ) in SD, consider firearms to be no more dangerous than a shovel or a pocketknife. Ive open carried a shotgun in public and haven't even gotten a sideways glance. That's not something id try in Chicago unless I had a death wish.
In South Dakota, you pay $10 to the Sheriff and get a shall issue CCW permit *on the spot*. Not 14 days later. Not 10 days later-immediately. Albeit it comes in a temporary paper format until the fancy schmancy card gets to your mailbox in two weeks.

By contrast, in NY if its anything like Chicago, the average Joe probably thinks just OWNING a gun marks someone as a criminal. Given that ive grown up in an anti-2A liberal zone ,the idea that gun laws can be truly insane isn't new to me-but folks I talk to here are flat out stunned at the stupidity other places have with regards to gun regulations. Many a time I've struck up a conversation with fellow gun owners-and gun sellers!- whilst waiting at the FFL , and once I mention Chicago and its stupid laws many locals are flat out stunned. You guys likely won't believe it , but plenty of people in this state are blissfully unaware of the criminal infringements others endure as a matter of course. Quite a few seasoned gun dealers ive talked to were utterly amazed that a citizen would need to ASK THE POLICE FOR PERMISSION to buy a gun.

Their reaction is similar to what we'd say if some foreigner mentioned needing police permission to buy an Xbox-the concept just doesn't occur to them. I can easily see this university president thinking "Well, I passed a national background check to buy the gun to start with and I'm declaring it at the gate. What problems could possibly occur? " .

BTW, those of you who think this guy should "know the law where he's going" should remember that laws-and documents-change frequently.I could easily print off a statue regarding legal transport of arms in State X, book a flight, and get arrested on landing because State X changed the law and neglected to update the website. Some gun laws *aren't even posted*. Unless you are internet savvy enough to find just the right forum and just the right resource to get ACCURATE data , its more likely than not you'll end up flying on what the military calls "bad intel" regardless of how responsible you try to be on the matter.

"Officer, PC section XYZ says im legal"

'Sorry bub, but its PC section ZYX now, and you have the right to remain silent,yadda yadda'.

Bill Carson

06-12-2012, 12:02 AM

Not everyone lives in states like CA and NY, and so not everyone thinks of the possibility of an arrest the moment he touches a gun. To most people in free states guns are commonplace, they're yet another tool. Do you check screwdriver laws if you happen to travel with one in your car? Do you always check traffic rules before going to NYC? Do you check whether wearing belts wider than 2" is legal there?

Come to think of it, the ignorance of the law, especially state and local laws for out-of-staters, should be an affirmative defense. After all, it is so for government employees, and no person can possibly know all the applicable laws in any situation, including lawyers and judges. We just have too many damn laws, for a lot of non-crimes and non-issues, and the penalties for committing these non-crimes are often more severe than for committing real crimes, with real victims.
It is called the Trifecta. There are 3 things you should know the law about before entering another state with these items , GUNS, MONEY,DRUGS (Prescription)

Tiberius

06-12-2012, 2:51 AM

I also like the lawsuit and hope the guy wins, and wins big. Delta accepted the gun, agreed to transport it, did transport it, then handed him to the cops. At a minimum, if that's their practice, they should have told him, before, "we report all guns to the NY cops."

Maestro Pistolero

06-12-2012, 5:16 AM

Yep. As pointed out, when Delta sold him a round trip ticket, and then checked his firearm, they knew that checking the gun on the return flight would trigger a police investigation which could result in felony charges. Upon check in, Benedetto could have been made aware of the somewhat unimaginable fact that a lawful US citizen may not even possess his lawfully owned, locked and unloaded firearm in one of the united states.

At that point, Benedetto could have instead flown in and out of Philly, perhaps leaving his gun in PA, or shipping his firearm home to himself without consequence.

At the root of this issue, is that NY and NJ have a handgun ban for all non-residents. THAT is the court case I am waiting for. I expect it won't go well for them.

Smokeybehr

06-12-2012, 5:48 AM

Many of you are missing the point.

How was the Delta agent to know that NYC was the plaintiff's ultimate destination on the inbound leg, and the starting point on the outbound leg? Even though he was in NYC, and under the jurisdiction of PANYNJ, he was still protected by FOPA as long as he was transporting his firearm in a manner that complied with FOPA and the airlines rules.

By the agent taking upon him/herself to call PANYNJ to report the plaintiff, absent the knowledge that a crime other than the simple possession had taken place (which is not a crime under FOPA), the agent opened him/herself and the company up to legal action.

SilverTauron

06-12-2012, 6:45 AM

Many of you are missing the point.

How was the Delta agent to know that NYC was the plaintiff's ultimate destination on the inbound leg, and the starting point on the outbound leg? Even though he was in NYC, and under the jurisdiction of PANYNJ, he was still protected by FOPA as long as he was transporting his firearm in a manner that complied with FOPA and the airlines rules.

Remember that the FOPA only applies if gun ownership is legal at the point of embarkation and at the destination.Someone flying from Colorado to NYC with a legally purchased handgun is NOT protected by the FOPA, as they are an out of state resident who cannot legally own the weapon at the destination.

By the agent taking upon him/herself to call PANYNJ to report the plaintiff, absent the knowledge that a crime other than the simple possession had taken place (which is not a crime under FOPA), the agent opened him/herself and the company up to legal action.
The issue is that the agent decided to call the cops instead of informing their client -say, back in Joe Foss Intl.-that flying to NY with a firearm is tremendously unwise.

Getting redress via the FOPA is a dead end-the reason NYC and NJ ignore it is because the 2nd Circuit court has decided on appeal that the authorities are empowered to arrest first and ask questions later,to paraphrase the ruling. You may have the right to legally travel with a firearm under Federal guidelines, but local police are legally empowered to toss you in the slam anyway.

command_liner

06-12-2012, 10:46 AM

I doubt that more than maybe Delta would do that and thats only because this is going to cost them- win or lose. But, 2A is a federal "individual right" and its even applied to the states I hear. Now add in the commerce clause and see how far things get with all airlines banning guns in checked baggage for a fundamental right involving interstate travel. I see major more expense fighting that kind of lawsuit than adding a simple computer program that deals with passengers with guns flying into cesspool states like NY, NJ, etc.

In the US, newer law supersedes old law. When the legislature or the
people rewrite the laws, the old law is not superior.

The commerce clause was written well before the 2nd Amendment. So
let us have that discussion about how the old law (Commerce clause)
can be used to ban guns in luggage, and how the new law ("shall not
infringe") is meaningless.

If the new law is meaningless, then LOTS of new law is meaningless.
The wicked Wickard tells us the Commerce Clause can ban the movement
of wheat. But the 2nd tells us the Commerce Clause cannot be used to
ban the movement of firearms.

mrdd

06-12-2012, 11:31 AM

In the US, newer law supersedes old law. When the legislature or the
people rewrite the laws, the old law is not superior.

The commerce clause was written well before the 2nd Amendment. So
let us have that discussion about how the old law (Commerce clause)
can be used to ban guns in luggage, and how the new law ("shall not
infringe") is meaningless.

If the new law is meaningless, then LOTS of new law is meaningless.
The wicked Wickard tells us the Commerce Clause can ban the movement
of wheat. But the 2nd tells us the Commerce Clause cannot be used to
ban the movement of firearms.

That means that we can toss most of the GCA since it is based on commerce clause powers. Good luck with that.

SilverTauron

06-12-2012, 11:52 AM

Airlines, like any other business, make decisions intended to ultimately increase their profit margin.

Given that airlines do not make much in profit after expenses are factored in, Delta is not about to commit market suicide by blanket banning the legal transport of firearms. Clients in states like South Dakota, Nebraska, Montana, Alaska,Texas, and other states of that nature will gladly fly Southwest next time they need to. In addition, military members' PCSing or deploying with weapons won't be flying Delta if "no gunz" becomes their official policy.

What's more likely to emerge from this is the aerial equivalent of a Midway USA zip code check before purchase, as in you plan your trip online, get an itenerary, and if you say you are transporting a gun to NY/NJ, the website generates a red windowed pop-up saying "PISTOL EES VERBOTEN". Considering the kind of folks who live in those states not very many customers will be offended or lost if the Airline denies transport to NJ or NY.

randian

06-12-2012, 1:46 PM

could someone fly to NY with a pistol, then upon landing, call the police and say the airline luggage handlers are in possession of an illegal pistol and have them arrested?
Better yet, call the police and say Delta is involved in an illegal gun smuggling operation. That will get Bloomberg's attention. Given how NY interprets its laws, Delta is either an accessory before the fact or a co-conspirator.

randian

06-12-2012, 1:50 PM

Considering the kind of folks who live in those states not very many customers will be offended or lost if the Airline denies transport to NJ or NY.
A blanket denial is wrong too. Some people can legally carry in NY or NJ, and an airline doesn't have the expertise to determine who.

randian

06-12-2012, 1:52 PM

One thing I find amusing is that this is a University president we're talking about, a group that almost universally opposes carrying firearms on university property.

Glock22Fan

06-12-2012, 2:15 PM

could someone fly to NY with a pistol, then upon landing, call the police and say the airline luggage handlers are in possession of an illegal pistol and have them arrested?

I think that is about as likely as them arresting the Captain of an aircraft that just brought in a drug mule with bags of heroin inside their body.

NorCal Mtn Flyer

06-12-2012, 2:24 PM

Geebus... how hard is it to add a few lines of code to check destination.

If destination = New York and
passenger check firearm flag = true
than error

You can't expect the departing city baggage agents to be abreast of all the stupid gun laws, but it's pretty easy to do with a computer.

Unless this whole thing was entrapment of some sort, but that's some serious tin foil...

I travel commercial airlines fairly frequently (never to NY), with various firearms packed in my checked luggage. Never have I ever seen any counter person designate anywhere that I have a firearm in my checked bags. All they care is that the 'unloaded firearm' certificate is signed and dated.

Only after the TSA has inspected the firearm/bag, do they put their little holographic sticker on the luggage destination tag. Even that I wonder about, as the regs supposedly state that NO indication of the presence of a firearm is to be placed on the bag.

paul0660

06-12-2012, 2:25 PM

One thing I find amusing is that this is a University president we're talking about, a group that almost universally opposes carrying firearms on university property.

And yet, he is doing the right thing. Sometime no one notices until it is their ox which is gored.

17+1

06-12-2012, 3:42 PM

Geebus... how hard is it to add a few lines of code to check destination.

A blanket denial is wrong too. Some people can legally carry in NY or NJ, and an airline doesn't have the expertise to determine who.

Police credentials can be easily read by the dumbest airline counter monkey. ;)

Kodemonkey

06-12-2012, 5:12 PM

Fixed it for you. :p :chris:

At least I'm not the only nerd here. Although I haven't written any substantial code in at least a decade.

randian

06-12-2012, 5:36 PM

Police credentials can be easily read by the dumbest airline counter monkey. ;)
I was thinking about the few well-connected civilians with carry permits. Besides, I don't want an airline counter agent in the business of determining whether the credentials I present are (1) genuine, and (2) authorize the actions I claim them to authorize. Send me on my way and let the other end sort things out.

SilverTauron

06-12-2012, 6:28 PM

I was thinking about the few well-connected civilians with carry permits.......

Hahaha

:rofl2:

While New York State may have a decent number of citizens with carry permits, the situation in NJ is deplorable. I remember lurking on a NJ gun forum once and noticed a topic posing the question of what a New Jersey CPL looked like. Several pages later, not one person could say from firsthand sight what it looks like-including law enforcement posters! They're so rarely issued even if someone has the pull to get one, they'd still be arrested because the cops wouldn't know what the permit looks like.This is the result when one needs to appear before a circuit court judge for a carry permit as is law in NJ. As such I doubt Delta or any other airline would loose money on banning guns on routes going to and from NJ.